Maybe this was a good thing for previous generations but in my experience, no. Why should I be loyal to company that will not raise my salary to market value or account for inflation, will lay me off at the drop of a hat, or has no path to further my career within the company (or career change)?
It would be great to be able to have the loyalty the boomers had to their employers but I think with most companies (especially in IT) IT personnel are treated like cattle. Why would I want to be loyal to that type of treatment? Only a deluded naive person would IMHO.
Maybe if you took a class that helped bridge the gap between finger painting and programming. You just have to learn how finger painting applies to programming and once you do your programming skills will increase. Everything is related to finger painting because it is art and a reflection of society as a whole, and that affects your programming unconsciously./sarc
Although, i have seen that taught in an art history class. Art history affects everything because culture.
You should tell that to Justice Scalia. He seems to think so.
Citizen United is predicated on the idea that Corporations are people therefore they have the same legal protections as citizens. As you pointed out, if you agree with that premise then it would follow that you should not be able to restrict which corporation can spend money in politics. This underlying idea, that corporations are people, is not new and has been around as judicial precedent since the founding of the republic.
Do you think that corporations should be able to influence elections despite their inability to vote? What is stopping the citizens that make up those corporations exercising their rights to express their opinions?
Money in politics is not a good thing. I don't think any one disputes that. What is disputed is that non-voting "people" are controlling the dialogue because of their vast reservoirs of cash.
That sounds like Food Babe logic. If you can't pronounce the chemicals that make your food it's bad for you and don't eat it!
If a prophets name doesn't sound "prophety" enough they are not a prophet.
Oh, wait - you're not one of those global warming priests are you?
tweaks to models to adjust for observations/measurements (and adding previously unknown variables) == whole theory is wrong because models are not 100% accurate
Oh, wait. you adjust your theories to fit preconceived notions rather than adjusting to observation.
Er...no. How about just letting engineers figure these things out like we always have?
How else do I tell people how to do something so I don't have to? I have no idea what engineers do or how they do it and I don't want to know! Engineers can do it yea sure but that's boring. *I* have imagination, and vision (and I saw an episode of Dr. Who last night!). Engineers should just listen to me, obviously./snark
Your use of "neckbeard" dates you, that was a hip term two years ago. I'm guessing you have a neckbeard fetish, there might be genre of porn just for you.
I actually just implemented Trac at the company I am with. They were in a similar state for their issue tracking (mouth, emails, sticky note, short bursts of development with potentially very long intervals between software releases). I did a little research and ended up with Trac http://trac.edgewall.org/ It comes with a wiki, issue tracking, integrated source control (if you want it), easy searching/reports, plugins, SVN plugin, and it's open source. It is a web-based system so keep that in mind.
Installation was easy as well. You can set up yourself (perl, apache, mysql, etc.) Or you can use Bitnami to install a fresh instance https://bitnami.com/stack/trac... there is plenty of documentation to get an instance installed and configured fairly easily. For non-techies the Bitnami installation is huge because "out of the box" it works fairly well. Configuring will take a little know how but once that is done it's smooth sailing.
We just released it to a wider audience of our customers and the feedback has been well received. It took a little time for me to setup but within a few days it was up and running behind SSL and authenticated to our active directory with LDAP. Anyone on our network can easily log in and the permissions are set up as a per project basis (each user is assigned to a project group that can view/edit wiki,tickets of their associated project group).
It has only been a short time since we released it so there still might be some growing pains but it so far has help us get away from change requests in word documents and email.
Funny enough, I was about to ask/. the same question months ago before I landed on Trac. Hope this helps. Good luck!
It has to do with FOX, and their motivation for showing the whole thing. What is their purpose in showing any portion of the clip, and what is their purpose in showing the whole thing?
Motivated by clicks, ads, and profits. But that motivation doesn't change even if they didn't show any of the video.
If you say that 30 seconds is the same as the whole thing, then you truly don't understand ISIS and you truly don't understand evil.
I understand fine enough. I think I mistyped in my previous response and missed a "not" (stupid negations), sorry. I meant to say that showing only 30 seconds is not the same thing as the 22 minute because "Fox is not deciding what is the most important part to see. Is it the actual murder? Or the response from the people in the streets (even if coerced)? Better to see propaganda for what it is then what someone else thinks is the important message."
All I am saying is that if you are going to show something abhorrent, give people the choice and let them see it all for themselves. Do not cut it up, censor it, alter it, w/e (translation would have been good). Especially if it is propaganda because the best propaganda is the kind that you are unaware of it being propaganda. Show it all or show none.
They are terrorists, and by showing the whole video and whipping people up into a frothy argument,
Yes, it will whip people in to a frothy argument (sorry if I came off that way). Does that mean we should not see pictures of the concentration camps, or is it okay because it was a generation ago? Should we not see planes fly into towers or it that okay because you couldn't see the terror on peoples faces? It will invoke strong emotions. We as a society have to manage our emotional responses to ensure they do not get the best of us. But that does not mean that we should forgo the responsibility of knowing the world we live in because we are emotionally ill-equipped to handle the reality of the world that we create and take part of.
Fox has played directly into their hands. As another commenter above has stated, Fox is practically the marketing department for ISIS now.
That is the same reason why liveleak banned the ISIS account. They didn't want to be the marketing arm of ISIS. However, I disagree with this. Liveleak and Fox are not directly helping or supporting ISIS by giving people access to information or disseminating their propaganda. Just like Wikipedia does not support or help the Nazis for giving information about Nazism.
Good journalism will show people what they do not want to see.
It serves no journalistic purpose. "legitimate concerns about the graphic nature of the video" very broadly misses the point. They don't need to show it any more than they need to show Mexican gang executions. It's lazy sensationalism meant to draw as many eyeballs as possible.
And what is the prevailing view of the drug war in Mexico? Most Americans are far away detached, aside from a few border towns whose sheriff gets shot. Maybe if the news did show the Mexican drug cartels who behead entire towns we would do something to help. http://america.aljazeera.com/o...
The Journalistic purpose is the same reason why there were so many pictures taken of the concentration camps when the allies liberated them. Lets not be ignorant of the world we live in. The news is ment to inform us.
As it stands now, Fox gave you a choice. Many people have died so that we can have a choice. Let's not denigrate their memory by obstructing the choices we have because you feel it is "lazy sensationalism".
and seeing a short clip of it isn't proof enough to stir up the national outrage to finally put a stop to it, no amount of video will.
How many videos did it take for Jordans outrage? Do you include the videos that murdered citizens from other countries? You have exactly what you describe, a short clip that caused a national outrage. Or do you think that flooding the internet with American and Japanese journalist beheadings would swing Jordanian politics to "earth shaking response"?
Fox showing the whole 22 minute clip is the same as showing the 30 seconds of screaming as a man is burned alive. They are giving you the choice to watch it all, in part, or none. I think, giving the audience the whole clip is better than only the 30 seconds because Fox is not deciding what is the most important part to see. Is it the actual murder? Or the response from the people in the streets (even if coerced)? Better to see propaganda for what it is then what someone else thinks is the important message.
I don't care who is right or who is wrong or what you can prove or what points were refuted... WHEN you HAVE to USE caps AND bolds AND bullshit FORMATTING charactesr THAT do NOTHING but make YOUR post HARD TO parse and read...ITS NOT WORTH READING.
I do have a issue with how's its been pushed on the country via the courts rather then referendums. As we saw with Roe v Wade, when a divisive social issue of this magnitude is decided by the courts before the popular support is there, it stays divisive. Unfortunately, that's what will happen w/ gay marriage.
But isn't that one of the roles of the judicial branch? If there is popular support for Jim Crow laws, the courts can throw those laws out usually with a judicial precedent (or setting one from a law). The people have power to vote for law makers. But that doesn't mean the laws created by the legislature will be inline with the constitution or other higher state laws (state constitution).
It isn't perfect but what is the alternative? The popular vote (whether direct or legislature) decides on all laws and issues? It seems, on various issues, the judiciary intervenes primarily on divisive topics ending the division (not for the public in discussion but for legal purposes and affected laws).
If you wanted to overturn some judicial precedent you can through a higher law. (state to overturn city, constitutional to overturn court)... It is slow and takes a lot of support and time... but that is the point. If a topic continues to be devisive to the point the courts get involved... I might be best to remove that from the legislature until enough people change their mind and it becomes the majority enough to change a higher law. (see Prohibition)
It is a subtle check and balance in our government that I think is a good thing. Really, when you say it forces people and states to accept a certain law or interpretation. What you are really complaining about is that to overturn that decision, it takes longer, more time, and more people to get your way on a divisive issue.
Slashdot Mirror
loyal to their employers (this is a good thing)
Maybe this was a good thing for previous generations but in my experience, no. Why should I be loyal to company that will not raise my salary to market value or account for inflation, will lay me off at the drop of a hat, or has no path to further my career within the company (or career change)?
It would be great to be able to have the loyalty the boomers had to their employers but I think with most companies (especially in IT) IT personnel are treated like cattle. Why would I want to be loyal to that type of treatment? Only a deluded naive person would IMHO.
Maybe if you took a class that helped bridge the gap between finger painting and programming. You just have to learn how finger painting applies to programming and once you do your programming skills will increase. Everything is related to finger painting because it is art and a reflection of society as a whole, and that affects your programming unconsciously. /sarc
Although, i have seen that taught in an art history class. Art history affects everything because culture.
But money isn't speech.
You should tell that to Justice Scalia. He seems to think so.
Citizen United is predicated on the idea that Corporations are people therefore they have the same legal protections as citizens. As you pointed out, if you agree with that premise then it would follow that you should not be able to restrict which corporation can spend money in politics. This underlying idea, that corporations are people, is not new and has been around as judicial precedent since the founding of the republic.
Do you think that corporations should be able to influence elections despite their inability to vote? What is stopping the citizens that make up those corporations exercising their rights to express their opinions?
Money in politics is not a good thing. I don't think any one disputes that. What is disputed is that non-voting "people" are controlling the dialogue because of their vast reservoirs of cash.
How do you reduce the blatant corruption and bribery infecting all levels of government? http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
That sounds like Food Babe logic. If you can't pronounce the chemicals that make your food it's bad for you and don't eat it!
If a prophets name doesn't sound "prophety" enough they are not a prophet.
Oh, wait - you're not one of those global warming priests are you?
tweaks to models to adjust for observations/measurements (and adding previously unknown variables) == whole theory is wrong because models are not 100% accurate
Oh, wait. you adjust your theories to fit preconceived notions rather than adjusting to observation.
At least they can communicate effectively at how well they are cleaning dishes.
Instant Gratification. We did this shit to ourselves because I can still pick up a pen and paper. You just refuse to wait.
I can pick up a pen and paper too but I don't think anyone wants to see that kind of instant gratification.
Kids on your lawn again.. amiright?
I think the real question is how often do we have scenes with two robots in them, talking about something other than humans.
Good god man. What have you done? The robots will now know that there is inherent roboticism in our media now. The end is nigh.
Er...no. How about just letting engineers figure these things out like we always have?
How else do I tell people how to do something so I don't have to? I have no idea what engineers do or how they do it and I don't want to know! Engineers can do it yea sure but that's boring. *I* have imagination, and vision (and I saw an episode of Dr. Who last night!). Engineers should just listen to me, obviously. /snark
That's what the government wants you to think!
Right there, do you see it? That small pixelated unrecognizable area next to that rock. Must be aliens.
Protip: If you zoom in on the pixelated area the evidence that it is aliens become clearer. The more you zoom the clearer it becomes.
Your use of "neckbeard" dates you, that was a hip term two years ago. I'm guessing you have a neckbeard fetish, there might be genre of porn just for you.
Refer to Rule34. HTH HAND.
sauce or it didn't happen.
leave behind a magical aura that affects you three days later.
Sounds like the beginning of a horror movie. It's the Ring meets Maximum Overdrive... God help us.
Hear here.
Show me the error bars. Best advice given by a high school science teacher.
+1 Trac :)
I actually just implemented Trac at the company I am with. They were in a similar state for their issue tracking (mouth, emails, sticky note, short bursts of development with potentially very long intervals between software releases). I did a little research and ended up with Trac http://trac.edgewall.org/ It comes with a wiki, issue tracking, integrated source control (if you want it), easy searching/reports, plugins, SVN plugin, and it's open source. It is a web-based system so keep that in mind.
/. the same question months ago before I landed on Trac. Hope this helps. Good luck!
Installation was easy as well. You can set up yourself (perl, apache, mysql, etc.) Or you can use Bitnami to install a fresh instance https://bitnami.com/stack/trac... there is plenty of documentation to get an instance installed and configured fairly easily. For non-techies the Bitnami installation is huge because "out of the box" it works fairly well. Configuring will take a little know how but once that is done it's smooth sailing.
We just released it to a wider audience of our customers and the feedback has been well received. It took a little time for me to setup but within a few days it was up and running behind SSL and authenticated to our active directory with LDAP. Anyone on our network can easily log in and the permissions are set up as a per project basis (each user is assigned to a project group that can view/edit wiki,tickets of their associated project group).
It has only been a short time since we released it so there still might be some growing pains but it so far has help us get away from change requests in word documents and email.
Funny enough, I was about to ask
Destroying the planet by poisoning the atmosphere with oxygen? :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxygenation_Event
I think there was a documentary that proves that men can be mothers.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01...
It has to do with FOX, and their motivation for showing the whole thing. What is their purpose in showing any portion of the clip, and what is their purpose in showing the whole thing?
Motivated by clicks, ads, and profits. But that motivation doesn't change even if they didn't show any of the video.
If you say that 30 seconds is the same as the whole thing, then you truly don't understand ISIS and you truly don't understand evil.
I understand fine enough. I think I mistyped in my previous response and missed a "not" (stupid negations), sorry. I meant to say that showing only 30 seconds is not the same thing as the 22 minute because "Fox is not deciding what is the most important part to see. Is it the actual murder? Or the response from the people in the streets (even if coerced)? Better to see propaganda for what it is then what someone else thinks is the important message."
All I am saying is that if you are going to show something abhorrent, give people the choice and let them see it all for themselves. Do not cut it up, censor it, alter it, w/e (translation would have been good). Especially if it is propaganda because the best propaganda is the kind that you are unaware of it being propaganda. Show it all or show none.
They are terrorists, and by showing the whole video and whipping people up into a frothy argument,
Yes, it will whip people in to a frothy argument (sorry if I came off that way). Does that mean we should not see pictures of the concentration camps, or is it okay because it was a generation ago? Should we not see planes fly into towers or it that okay because you couldn't see the terror on peoples faces? It will invoke strong emotions. We as a society have to manage our emotional responses to ensure they do not get the best of us. But that does not mean that we should forgo the responsibility of knowing the world we live in because we are emotionally ill-equipped to handle the reality of the world that we create and take part of.
Fox has played directly into their hands. As another commenter above has stated, Fox is practically the marketing department for ISIS now.
That is the same reason why liveleak banned the ISIS account. They didn't want to be the marketing arm of ISIS. However, I disagree with this. Liveleak and Fox are not directly helping or supporting ISIS by giving people access to information or disseminating their propaganda. Just like Wikipedia does not support or help the Nazis for giving information about Nazism.
Good journalism will show people what they do not want to see.
It serves no journalistic purpose. "legitimate concerns about the graphic nature of the video" very broadly misses the point. They don't need to show it any more than they need to show Mexican gang executions. It's lazy sensationalism meant to draw as many eyeballs as possible.
And what is the prevailing view of the drug war in Mexico? Most Americans are far away detached, aside from a few border towns whose sheriff gets shot. Maybe if the news did show the Mexican drug cartels who behead entire towns we would do something to help. http://america.aljazeera.com/o...
The Journalistic purpose is the same reason why there were so many pictures taken of the concentration camps when the allies liberated them. Lets not be ignorant of the world we live in. The news is ment to inform us.
As it stands now, Fox gave you a choice. Many people have died so that we can have a choice. Let's not denigrate their memory by obstructing the choices we have because you feel it is "lazy sensationalism".
and seeing a short clip of it isn't proof enough to stir up the national outrage to finally put a stop to it, no amount of video will.
How many videos did it take for Jordans outrage? Do you include the videos that murdered citizens from other countries? You have exactly what you describe, a short clip that caused a national outrage. Or do you think that flooding the internet with American and Japanese journalist beheadings would swing Jordanian politics to "earth shaking response"?
Fox showing the whole 22 minute clip is the same as showing the 30 seconds of screaming as a man is burned alive. They are giving you the choice to watch it all, in part, or none. I think, giving the audience the whole clip is better than only the 30 seconds because Fox is not deciding what is the most important part to see. Is it the actual murder? Or the response from the people in the streets (even if coerced)? Better to see propaganda for what it is then what someone else thinks is the important message.
War has rules.
The only rule to war is to win. Rules of war are there because we have to live with ourselves and our opponent after the war.
Better to think of the conquered/conquerer as gentlemen than a savage. Savagery begets savagery.
I don't care who is right or who is wrong or what you can prove or what points were refuted... WHEN you HAVE to USE caps AND bolds AND bullshit FORMATTING charactesr THAT do NOTHING but make YOUR post HARD TO parse and read...ITS NOT WORTH READING.
I do have a issue with how's its been pushed on the country via the courts rather then referendums. As we saw with Roe v Wade, when a divisive social issue of this magnitude is decided by the courts before the popular support is there, it stays divisive. Unfortunately, that's what will happen w/ gay marriage.
But isn't that one of the roles of the judicial branch? If there is popular support for Jim Crow laws, the courts can throw those laws out usually with a judicial precedent (or setting one from a law). The people have power to vote for law makers. But that doesn't mean the laws created by the legislature will be inline with the constitution or other higher state laws (state constitution).
It isn't perfect but what is the alternative? The popular vote (whether direct or legislature) decides on all laws and issues? It seems, on various issues, the judiciary intervenes primarily on divisive topics ending the division (not for the public in discussion but for legal purposes and affected laws).
If you wanted to overturn some judicial precedent you can through a higher law. (state to overturn city, constitutional to overturn court)... It is slow and takes a lot of support and time... but that is the point. If a topic continues to be devisive to the point the courts get involved... I might be best to remove that from the legislature until enough people change their mind and it becomes the majority enough to change a higher law. (see Prohibition)
It is a subtle check and balance in our government that I think is a good thing. Really, when you say it forces people and states to accept a certain law or interpretation. What you are really complaining about is that to overturn that decision, it takes longer, more time, and more people to get your way on a divisive issue.